9. Voting: The Committee shall consider all eligible candidates and voting shall be based upon the individual’s record, ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contribution to the game. Electors may vote for as few as zero (0) and as many as four (4) eligible candidates deemed worthy of election. Write-in votes are not permitted (Editor’s note: though if you want to post them, I’m not going to stop you from doing that).

10. Number to be Elected: All candidates receiving votes on at least 75% of ballots cast on will earn election.

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. Charlie Grimm. I would have included him as a write-in if he wasn't eligible. He'd be in the Hall of Fame already if he could have converted one of those National League pennants into a World Series victory, thereby preempting any notion of a Cubs curse. As it is, he has 4 first place finishes, 3 seconds and 4 thirds. He's 220 games over .500. And he has over 1200 wins for his career.

2. Whitey Herzog. I realize that it's hard for a manager to get a lot of credit nowadays for having been an expert in smallball yet there's no arguing with the results. Three straight division crowns with Kansas City ('76-'78). Three National League pennants with the St. Louis Cardinals, including a World Series victory.

3. Billy Martin. He won a division crown with four different franchises, guided the Yankees to back-to-back American League pennants and won a World Series. I would like a little bit more outside of his Yankee years- it would have been nice to turn one of those other division crowns into at least a World Series berth. But if a line for managers has been established, he's above it.

4. Doug Harvey. It's hard to evaluate umpires so I tend to rely on the opinions of those who know (or at least, those who should know). In the previous veterans ballots, Harvey has consistently finished in the top two (along with Whitey Herzog). That's based on the votes of players he would have worked with. That's good enough for me.

And explaining the "no" votes.

Hank O'Day. I can't say this is a definitive "No." But this is the first I've heard of him and the Hall of Fame already has three umpires from the first quarter of the 20th century. I'm open to his candidacy down the road but I want to hear more before I vote yes.

Danny Murtaugh and Tom Kelly. Both are two-time World Series winners, 11 years apart in Murtaugh's case and 4 years for Kelly. I think the line for HoF managers is drawn above these guys, even if there are a few illegitimate exceptions.

Steve O'Neill and Davey Johnson. One World Series a piece and only one pennant a piece. Not enough.

Gene Mauch. Never made it to a World Series, won only two division crowns and finished with a career won-loss percentage under .500. Not even close.

These ballots are especially hard with no discussion. I don't even recognize Danny Murtaugh, Steve O'Neill and Hank O'Day.

Danny Murtaugh was the long-tenured manager of the Pirates. He was with them for their 1960 and 1971 championships.

Steve O'Neill was a pretty good defensive catcher for the Indians who became the manager of the Tigers after World War II. He won one World Series ('45) and finished second three other times in a four-year span.

You can check out the bb-ref pages for their full records.

Hank O'Day was an umpire from roughly 1890-1920. He umpired the first World Series and later made the famous call on Merkle's Boner.

I remember Harvey from the "You Make the Call" segments in between innings of NBC's Game of the Week. Good times.

1. Billy Martin
2. Charlie Grimm
3. Doug Harvey
4. Danny Murtaugh

Kelly and Mauch have losing records. No.

Johnson has a great winning percentage - better than any of the other managerial candidates. But he only made one Fall Classic.

I have Murtaugh a hair better than Herzog. Murtaugh had five playoff appearances, Herzog had six, Murtaugh won two championships, Herzog one. Murtaugh has a .540 win pct, Herzog .532. Slight edge to Murtaugh, although I have no problems with the White Rat getting in.

My impression of Harvey is that he was a popular umpire more than a good umpire, because of his easy-going, good-natured demeanor. Is that wrong?

From everything I know, yes - that's wrong. Harvey was known as the umpire's umpire. He lasted forever and was always known for solid, quality work. His fellow umpires nicknamed him "God" towards the end. Aside from Bill Klem, I don't know of any ump who was as widely regarded as Harvey.

Eligible Candidates:
A. Eligible candidates must be selected from Baseball Managers and Umpires who have been retired from organized Baseball as Managers or Umpires for at least five (5) years prior to the election. If the candidate is 65 years old at the time of retirement, the waiting period is reduced to six (6) months. If the candidate reaches the age of 65 during the five-year waiting period, the candidate becomes eligible six months after the candidate's 65th birthday.
B. Those whose careers entailed involvement as both manager or umpire, and another category (managers/executives/umpires/players) will be considered for their overall contribution to the game of Baseball; however, the specific category in which these individuals shall be considered will be determined by the role in which they were most prominent. In those instances when a candidate is prominent as both a player and as a manager, executive or umpire, the BBWAA-appointed Historical Overview Committee shall determine that individual's candidacy as a player (Players Ballot), as a manager or as an umpire (Managers/Umpires Ballot) or as an executive/pioneer (Executive/Pioneer Ballot). Candidates may only appear on one ballot per election. Those designated as players must fulfill the requirements of 6 (A).

So, yes, you can consider playing careers as well. But I don't think I'd rate any of these guys as more than just good players, and that doesn't really make much difference to me.

John/Joe can correct me on this, but I think it's open to all BBTF readers. Note the HoF rules above.

Yes, both Veterans Committee ballots are open to all posters here at BBTF.

These ballots are especially hard with no discussion.

Since the real HOF election is next Monday, I had to limit this to just the ballot threads so we would at least keep pace with them. With that said, I have no problem discussing the merits of the candidates here.

As with the executives I sure don't know much about the umpires. It kinda seems like Montezuma's revenge that managers and umpires should have to share a category. I can just see Earl Weaver and Doug Harvey going at it over who should go into the HoF.

As to the managers, Grimm and Herzog seem to be a cut above the others. And I'll throw O'Day and Harvey into the mix as well, just to keep things even.

I feel like I should have something intelligent to say about the managers' HoM qualifications, but here's the thing: they are all really good candidates, but no one is overwhelmingly qualified. It really comes down to how much a big Hall, little Hall guy you are.

I am a bit surprised by some of the rationales used. Yeah, Gene Mauch had a losing record .. . but look at the quality handed to him.

My personal rankings . . .well, I can see a lot of different ways of doing it.

I'd probably put Herzog up top. Please note he was not only St. Louis's manager but also GM for most of the 1980s. If playing credit can be considered, GM credit definately should. Herzog had a specific approach to winning, and implemented it as well as anyone.

At the bottom end I'd probably put Steve O'Neill and Tom Kelly. Both were first-rate, but more HoVG managers. Kelly was great with his sort of players, but not very flexible. He's the guy who wanted David Ortiz to quit hitting for power. Kelly was great with batting average-centric players who didn't fan, but that's all he could manage it seems. O'Neill was the Tony Perez of managers - if Perez lasted only 15 years. O'Neill was always pretty dang good, but never more than that.

The others it's just pick'em. I'll note this: managers generally had more authority over the roster when Grimm managed than now. In his book on managers, Bill James said GMs initially were only in charge of the farm system, and managers in charge of acquiring vets. It wasn't until around mid-century that changed. Grimm's teams kept winning. He also won a minor league manager of the year award (from The Sporing News?) with Milwaukee in the early 1950s.

Davey Johnson: I think he got screwed over numerous times by his teams, but he just plain didn't have a long enough career to qualify. Phil Garner managed more games. While Johnson didn't deserve his firings, I wouldn't vote for someone based on woulda, coulda, shoulda. I have similar problems with Murtaugh as a candidate. Murtaugh's problem was a weak heart that caused Pittsburgh to contanatly pull him out of the dugout for health related issues. Yeah, I know Billy Southworth lasted longer than either, but neither dominated their time like Southworth did (and for that matter Southworth had a tremendous minor league managerial career. I recognize that's had no impact on his HoF candidacy, but this is the HoM, where that stuff plays a role - just ask Earl Averill).

Billy Martin: he'll be a hero for one year and a disaster by the third. Personally, I'd vote for him. The goal is to gain the hardware as flags fly forever. He only won one world title, but took four of his five clubs to the postseason, and I think there's enough of a crsphoot element in October that I'm pretty impressed by what Martin did. He was a great bet to put his team in contention for at least a little window. I think that matters a lot.

Gene Mauch: there's a toughie. Like I said, I wouldn't hold his losing record against him, and generally feel he got the most out of his teams for 20-plus years. . . . . but never winning a pennant ever? Boy, I know I just said it was a crapshoot in October and his teams shouldn't be held against him, but never winning a pennant? You'd have to be REALLY sure about how much that stuff matters before voting for Mauch, that's all I'll say.

Actually, there is one overwhelmingly qualified guy here: Doug Harvey.

I hated Whitey's Cardinals more than any team in history, but it's hard to argue with results. And for all his irritating personality and opinions, it's notable that he had two long runs that were both very successful.

Grimm seems more of a case of longevity than anything else. Even his intangible wealth of stories can't make up for that. I can't see where his teams ever outperformed their talent.

I love Billy Martin as a True Yankee and all that, but for all his genius he was far too fixated on the short term, and what he did to that A's starting rotation in 1980 is alone enough to disqualify him in my book. Brilliant baseball mind but way too out of control and quick to pass the blame.

Davey Johnson's close, and I might vote for him the next time around. It's interesting to note just how quickly the Orioles fell off the cliff as soon as he got fired.

This is a good ballot - with one exception, I think everyone has an argument. My picks:

Whitey Herzog - Easily the #1 choice on this ballot. The Royals were treading water when he took over in 1975, and he straightened them out almost immediately. Quick and decisive in St. Louis, as well. Plus (as Bill James wrote) he faced up to baseball's growing drug problem when no one else would.

Doug Harvey - The best umpire in the NL while I was growing up. Controlled the game, didn't let it control him. Also a top-notch basketball referee as well. Another easy choice.

Danny Murtaugh - Might be a little bit of homerism here :) Seriously, he inherited a mess from Bobby Bragan, a team with some good young talent which didn't know whether it was coming or going, and straightened it out in a hurry. A 36-67 team went 26-25 after Murtaugh was hired, finished second the following year, and won it all in 1960.

Davey Johnson - Short career, to be sure, but outstanding one; he did manage over 2000 games and his teams were consistently in the thick of things, and for the most part he did it without any long-term negative impacts.

Comments on the other guys:

Charley Grimm - Similar to Chuck Tanner, in my book; couldn't push a team over the top when it needed to be pushed.

Gene Mauch - 1964 works against him, and his mishandling of the Dick Allen situation doesn't help, either (although given the fact that he was working for the Carpenters I'm not sure how much to hold that against him). He was good with lesser teams, not so good with talent.

Hank O'Day - He's here only because of the Merkle ruling. From what I can tell, he wasn't exactly highly regarded among umpires at the time; he was behind Klem, Emslie, and Jim Johnstone (at least) among NL umps and behind Evans and Silk O'Loughlin among AL umps. I don't see a case at all. And I don't think he deserves as much credit for the Merkle ruling as he's gotten over the years.

Tom Kelly - Two pennants and WS titles, yes, just like Murtaugh. But as Chris notes he had some peculiarities in the way that he did things, and I think he got less out of the talent that he had on hand than he should have. Both teams that won pennants for him fell apart rather quickly.

Billy Martin - Great short-term manager, but personal demons kept him from being a great one over the long haul. Unlike his mentor Stengel, he didn't know when to fold 'em. Stengel was as driven as Martin, but he also knew when and how to turn the switch off.

Steve O'Neill - Short career, good but not great. Except in Philly, teams always seemed to be somewhat less than the sum of their parts. Had trouble with the players in Boston after succeeding McCarthy (in fairness, probably anyone would have).

I'm close to saying Martin is worth it -- provided you have the wit to fire him quickly. He was just so good at a really important job, but he was a solid bet to burn out every member of the rotation given time and that has a fairly obvious down-side.

None of the others quite measure up to my mind, though none are a mistake.

Hank O'Day is right on the cusp. His career as player, manager, and umpire is pretty unique, but I think you have to be a Klem or a Harvey to get in as an umpire, and I don't quite think he's at that level. He did make, arguably, the most famous single call in baseball history, though!

Billy Martin seems to me to be the great white shark of managers, gorging himself on young pitcher arms and leaving a bloody, shredded mess in his wake...

Hank O'Day - He's here only because of the Merkle ruling. From what I can tell, he wasn't exactly highly regarded among umpires at the time; he was behind Klem, Emslie, and Jim Johnstone (at least) among NL umps and behind Evans and Silk O'Loughlin among AL umps. I don't see a case at all. And I don't think he deserves as much credit for the Merkle ruling as he's gotten over the years.

I'm not sure about this, Mike. I have seen a number of contemporary quotes extolling O'Day's skill behind the plate.

Charley Grimm - Similar to Chuck Tanner, in my book; couldn't push a team over the top when it needed to be pushed.

This I don't agree with at all. Similar to Tanner? The book I have on the 1935 Cubs notes times he was perfectly willing to metaphorically kick some butt in the clubhouse. That ain't Tanner.

Couldn't push a team over the top when it needed to? He took over the Cubs late in 1932 and they responded with a major rally to claim the pennant. Three years later, they had one of the longest winning streaks in NL history to claim the pennant narrowly over the Cardinals. This is a guy who couldn't push his team over the top when needed?

Heck, even the '44 Cubs - who were 1-10 when he took over, posted a winning record the rest of the way and then claimed the pennant the next year. Grimm didn't take the Braves to the promised land, but was he the reason the 1955 Dodgers started out the year 22-2? The '56 Braves were in first place two weeks before he was canned. I can't imagine he would've done worse managing them then Fred Haney did over the next few years.

Chuck Tanner won only one pennant. Grimm won three over a thirteen year period. That's a distinct difference. No Chuck Tanner team would ever be that good for more than a short span.

Tom Kelly - Two pennants and WS titles, yes, just like Murtaugh. But as Chris notes he had some peculiarities in the way that he did things, and I think he got less out of the talent that he had on hand than he should have. Both teams that won pennants for him fell apart rather quickly.

Even as a Twins fan, I didn't vote for Kelly. But he was an outstanding manager in-game. My fondest memories are of Kelly consistently beating the Red Sox. I'm sure there's some selective memory, some late inning heroics, some games I just happened to see live at the Dome that went a certain way. But, still, it seemed that there would always be some late inning situation where Kelly would grab a platoon advantage and stuff it down John McNamara's throat. That's the way I remember it, anyway.

My Ballot:
Yes: Whitey Herzog
Yes: Doug Harvey
Yes: Charlie Grimm - amazingly, his long, yet below-average career as a 1B may have just pushed him over the top. But I also can't find anything in his managerial record to indicate that he doesn't belong.
Yes: Davey Johnson - He is the peak to Grimm's career vote.

Close, but no: Danny Murtaugh - The prime. If I could vote for five, he'd be in.
Close, but no: Steve O'Neill - similar to Grimm, but the difference is that Grimm got the most out of several different team cores, while O'Neill, although never experiencing a losing season, only hit great heights with the Tigers of WWII and the immediate post-WWII years.

No: Billy Martin - great successes, but very divisive and destructive. And yes - managers doing poorly can negate the good they have otherwise achieved.
No: Tom Kelly - 2 titles are great, but 8 consecutive losing seasons for any manager not named Connie Mack is too big a black mark to overlook.
No: Hank O'Day - one ump at a time please
Gene Mauch - I get the love for him, but not a HOF'er

This is great. I dug up my 2007 ballot, and I can just apply half of it here. In fact, I'll stick with three. Alphabetically:

<u>2010 Veterans' Committee - Managers & Umpires Ballot</u>

Harold Douglas Harvey – “God”
I think when the majority of players have tremendous respect for an umpire, he must be good at his job. After this, maybe we can elect Dutch Rennert.Dorrel Norman Elvert Herzog – “Whitey”
A manager who learned to play to the strengths of his ballclubs. Ironically, sending Ted Simmons away to Milwaukee may be the best example of how he built a winning ballclub.Alfred Manuel Martin – “Billy”
I can’t think of anyone else who could turn teams around quite like he did. He made winners out of the Rangers, for crying out loud. He definitely couldn’t stick around for years, but he made an immediate impact.

Mauch, Kelly, and Grimm were close, but I couldn't really separate one of them to be the fourth pick. So maybe next time. If there is a next time...

Whitey Herzog - I've always wondered how much credit he actually deserves for those Mets World Series teams in 1969-1973. His bios seem to hint at the fact that he was a primary builder of those teams, but you don't get that from other sources. My formative years as a baseball fan in KC make this a completely biased vote.

I'm torn on Billy Martin, but I guess I'll pass. So just Whitey for me.

I am in the middle of moving, so my books are packed away. However, I swear that in a compendium of baseball short stories, there is one about Hank O'Day (and if it's not him, the character is him in faint disguise) falling in love with a pretty girl. I will locate that book tomorrow.

Also, stumbled across this from the SABR site bio on Dummy Taylor: Hank O'Day may have gotten the last word, or sign, on Taylor. Taylor was coaching first base and O'Day was behind the plate. Taylor was making a spinning motion, indicating that O'Day had wheels in his head. Taylor was telling him off in sign language. O'Day got even, spelling "You go to the clubhouse. Pay $25." O'Day knew sign language, having been raised by a deaf parent and other relatives.

Anyway:
Harvey and O'Day are freaking locks for me.
Martin is in.

I'm going to reverse field on Kelly, and Whitey falls just short for me. I know his big problem was getting there, but if Mauch had done *anything* in the postseason, I might could sneak a vote that way. As is, nope.

Hank O'Day is right on the cusp. His career as player, manager, and umpire is pretty unique, but I think you have to be a Klem or a Harvey to get in as an umpire, and I don't quite think he's at that level.

Just to note on O'Day:
2710 games behind home plate, 2nd all-time
10 World Series, 2nd all-time
Behind home plate for no-hitters in four decades, only matched by Wendelstedt
Still the only person to play, manage, and ump in the NL

I don't see how he's not Harvey. And nobody's Klem.
----------
That is, of course, without even talking about his playing career.

Factoid: Hank O'Day tied for the Player's League lead in saves in its only year (1890) with George Hemming. Each had 3.

1. Doug Harvey - "God", the most respected umpire of his era (1962-92). 4,670 games on the field.
2. Whitey Herzog - the architect of the St. Louis Cardinals in the 1980's with his own distinctive brand of baseball that was seemingly perfect for that team, ballpark and era. Also very successful with the Royals.
3. Billy Martin - One of the most exciting and controversial managers ever. Won one World Series and had a .553 lifetime winning percentage with teams that generally exceeded expectations.
4. Danny Murtaugh - Very borderline for me, but it's hard to ignore his 2 World Series rings and .540 winning percentage.

I'll vote tomorrow after sleeping on it. Obviously, these selections are more subjective than players. A manager with a team of no talent players who leads them to a .505 record may have done a better job than one who took a really loaded team to a .530 record. The best umpire is said to be one you never notice.

Additionally, for managers I think it is also okay to consider playing accomplishments & other contributions to the game. Conversely, if someone is being considered as a player I think it is wrong to give extra credit for years as a hitting coach. It may sounds weird, but a managerial selection is more of a total career thing than just the managing wins and losses. It hasn't happened in the past, but I think there would be nothing wrong with an exceptional coach with a long career getting considered for the Hall of Fame. Not every coach should be a manager. That doesn't mean they could never contribute enough to the game to be a HoF's. Not to switch sports, but consider how many guys have been outstanding offensive or defensive coordinators for years and years. They have no chance to make the HoF unless they move to a job they may not be well suited to doing. I'm a medium sized Hall guy for players, but I think I'm more of a big Hall guy for executives/managers/coaches/announcers. Just not the same thing to me as enshrinement as a player.

and Johnny Sain.
He was a greater player: earned a major league job (Mazzone didn't), kept one for a long time, starred for a few seasons (Duncan didn't). At one time he was considered the greatest pitching coach.

I wonder whether that 1948 season of "Spahn and Sain and pray for rain" ruined his arm. He led the league in Batters Faced by a margin greater than 15%.

Hank O’Day - I love the breadth of his ump-ing career (1888 start, 1927 finish). He was there as the game completely evolved. Umped in first WS game in 1903, and made the Merkle call.

Charlie Grimm - Good combo candidate, playing 20 seasons (2,299 hits) and managing 19 including 3 Cubs World Series (!).

Billy Martin - Extremely memorable baseball figure for 5 different franchises; the kind of exhibit that brings back a flood of memories for some and inspires amazing storytelling to those who missed the adventures.

.............

If I picked a 4th (I didn't), probably would be combo guy Davey Johnson.

1. Hank O'Day - There's something about his career - player, manager, umpire - and its timing, plus the fact that he was there for Merkle's play, that seems to make him a symbolic figure from an historical point of view.
2. Doug Harvey - Umpires deserve more acknowledgement if they are any good. Going by reptuation, Harvey fits that bill.
3. Whitey Herzog - The 1970s and 1980s were competitively very balanced, yet he gets about six divisional or league flags across those fifteen or so years. Really needs another ring to provide a rock-solid case, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here.

Not voting for:
Billy Martin - Oh, how I want to. His time at the helm of the Tigers falls for me exactly in that 11-year-old's moment that marks each of our individual Golden Age of Baseball. But his destructive side is too obtrusive to ignore.
Tom Kelly - More World Series' rings than Herzog, but there's too much mediocrity in amongst the triumphs. I'd welcome the opportunity to reconsider him in the future.
Danny Murtaugh - His health problems create the same obstacle as Martin's belligerence. A guy can fall short of the HoF due to injury affecting his playing time, and I view Murtaugh that way. As with Kelly, I'd welcome another chance to consider him, and would probably rank him first from any of these that I am not voting for.
Charlie Grimm - Needs a World Series title to win my vote.
Johnson, Mauch, O'Neill - Not enough, but for different reasons in each case.

1. Doug Harvey -- easy pick.
2. Charlie Grimm -- No he didn't win a World Series, but that's a crapshoot, anyway. He got teams there pretty regularly. Lots of counting stats but not much value as a player.
3. Whitey Herzog -- As Earl Weaver declined, he became the most successful and strategically influential manager in baseball. Gets additional credit for picking his own talent.
4. Hank O'Day -- sort of a guess, but the info provided for him on this thread is compelling.

The rest are all reasonable candidates, but Murtaugh, Kelly, and Johson were successful managers but not significant strategic figures in the game or clearly transformers of teams, which are the two things I look for in a manager for the HoF. Martin fulfills those criteria, but his high index of self- and team-destruction keeps him out. Mauch and O'Neill just weren't all that successful.

Evidently the committee finished its work Sunday (see the Executives #70 ff) but I don't believe the mock election is or should be over. We didn't really hope to influence them or try to predict winners.

At baseball-fever one advocate for Murtaugh has gradually or continually made a case that is good enough for me. Once a growing fan of the Phillies during the Pennsylvania era of the NL East, I may be unusually vulnerable. I saw a few Pirates games at the Vet, at least two with a baseball best friend who was a primary Pirates fan. Maybe that helps too.

Just to note on O'Day:
2710 games behind home plate, 2nd all-time
10 World Series, 2nd all-time
Behind home plate for no-hitters in four decades, only matched by Wendelstedt
Still the only person to play, manage, and ump in the NL

Home town bonus for Murtaugh. If he gets enshrined in the next 30 years, I guess he would be the last Pirate to enter the Hall in my lifetime - unless Andrew McCutchen can put together a HOF career and stay a Pirate.

A posthumous induction ceremony for Billy Martin would probably have some entertainment value.